Browse Comments — Clean (de-noised)

Where is AI taking us? That’s the question we should be asking. Not just what AI can do, but what it means for us as humans, businesses, and society. Are we moving toward a future where humans become more efficient, more creative, and more capable? Or are we quietly becoming dependent on systems we no longer fully understand? The real question behind AI is not just about technology. It’s about **purpose, control, and responsibility**. What’s the backup plan if AI changes faster than our ability to adapt? Interested in your thoughts: Are we building AI to serve humanity — or slowly shaping humanity

Matthew Kilkenny 9 PM... Just about bedtime for an old codger like me. But brother, you are on a roll and you are right where you belong. Have no doubt I want to chat with you and participate to the extent that I can. You’re an amazing man and what you are doing is beyond important.

Human Centric frameworks that puts AI-Forward is a good balance. But orgs who put AI-First without having that Human I. The loop are starting to realize the drawbacks.

The speed of these updates is wild. I'm especially interested to see how CodeMender handles those security fixes in real-time.

Jeffrey Vahanian, CFP® Thank you for the affirmation brother it is 9am in China been up since 530am. Having breakfast and it aitn a full Irish ☘️ I just had a boiled egg 🥚 cooked in Tea ☕️

Since you mentioned the Pope I'll offer a sort of alternative but I've also got something to put on the main thread... it's a unique situation for people to begin to recognize the flaws and true flaws in human nature. But it's a rare sort of leader and I exclude both Bernie and the pope who can lead us through such a thing without manifesting the flaws common to man. (Bernie like Hennry Kissneger realizes the issue, but again few can address that issue without wrecking individual liberty).

The one man I would never trust to square that circle is Bernie. I will however suggest a candidate for debunking the toxic hype surrounding the new technology. This is not Whatley's only series. But the 4th video on this series makes a great (I believe sound) argument.

While I am not a fan or supporter of Bernie Sanders usually, he raises a very valid and important question again. Others have raised similar questions, and I posted something about it a while back. The human factors around AI as a tool are what we all should be concerned about. Who designs it and builds it? Why? What purposes will it serve? Who controls it, and how? What happens when it gets misused? Will perceived benefits really be beneficial? Who monitors the monitors? And so on...

Socialist Propaganda

The Pope Is right to liken the AI 🤖 arms race with the nuclear ☢️ arms race : the ungoverned AI swarm dropped on humanity could be deadlier. Do you agree or disagree? Dropped two years ago :

This is exactly why private AI infrastructure matters. AI is useful. The problem is not AI. The problem is stacking metered tools until the “automation” costs more than the work it replaced. At some point, serious businesses will stop asking, “Which AI subscription should we add next?” They will start asking, “Which parts of this should we own?” That is the shift.

Unbeknown to most the Vatican 🇻🇦 was one of the first to launch its AI ACT inn2025. The USA 🇺🇸?

To the Church ⛪️ and all theologians God is best described as #LOVE: can that be measured or is it a beautiful eternal mystery that we can only swim “deeper in and higher up”?

srsly...the Emperor's church as the moral high ground 🤣 ...the image implies the world hinges upon his word on #AI the handful of people at this event are cut from the same cloth and speak with the same tongue. #AI development needs more than lip service and leaven.

Let’s see what’s will be next...

Is that guy barefoot? Yes, that’s all I got out of that.

Very much informative 👏

Emotional intelligence is becoming the real competitive advantage. Insightful post by Justin Wright discussing how high performers often succeed because of emotional discipline, not just technical intelligence. • Self-awareness prevents unnecessary conflict • Empathy strengthens leadership influence • Calm responses build psychological safety • Emotional control protects long-term decisions • Respectful communication multiplies trust Also appreciated the reflections shared by professionals in the comments discussing emotional maturity in workplaces. “The strongest minds are usually the calmest under pressure.” “Reaction is instinct. Response is intelligence.” “A person who understands emotions leads differently.” Modern leadership is no longer about domination. It is about emotional regulation, listening, and creating environments where people feel psychologically safe enough to contribute honestly. Warm regards, Dr.(India ) Dhruv Bhikadiya 📍 Timmins, Ontario 📧 drpatel7171@gmail.com LinkedIn Blogspot Academia

Sure, choose humans because we are cheaper. No problem with that!

Matthew Kilkenny Thank you Matthew. Roman Yampolski says AI safety is unsolvable even with decades of research and billions invested. He’s right about the angle—but the angle is wrong. Post-hoc governance of systems already capable of acting becomes intractable under capability scaling. That’s the wall he’s hitting. The impossibility pattern inverts the problem: authority-bearing execution becomes structurally impossible unless admissibility is deterministically certified at commitment. You don’t control what’s already capable. You structure the boundary so capacity doesn’t exist until conditions verify. The Vatican faces the same challenge. Unless they’re examining the execution boundary as the control mechanism itself, they’ll hit Yampolski’s wall too. Most governance assumes managing increasingly capable systems through oversight and accountability. Those matter downstream. But execution-boundary governance answers what appears unsolvable everywhere else—not how to control what’s already capable, but how to structure systems so effect-bearing execution is impossible unless valid admissibility exists at commitment.